Naming and shaming youth offenders is naive

Gregory Shadbolt

Gregory Shadbolt is the Principal Legal Officer for the Queensland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Service Ltd. Photo: Supplied

Imagine an immature, Aboriginal teenage girl about to be sentenced for a range of repeated drug-related property offences.

Imagine that this 'child' has lived on the streets for the last five years to escape a highly dysfunctional family environment - one which has included being repeatedly raped by an intoxicated uncle since the age of eight.

Imagine that the only real family this child now has is a group of street-living peers with similar tales of extreme disadvantage.

The child turns to drugs (and thus to offending) in order to deaden the pain of her past.

Advertisement

Her legal representative, a thick-skinned, somewhat cynical defence lawyer, is much to his embarrassment and despite his best endeavours, moved to tears during the sentencing process.

Wind the clock forward a number of years and the Queensland Government has now introduced to parliament harsh new laws aimed at youth offenders.

The Government's new reforms dramatically change the baseline principles of youth sentencing by:

removing the requirement of detention as a last resort;

'naming and shaming' repeat youth offenders, by publishing their names;

adding a new offence for breaching bail with a maximum of one year's detention;

making all juvenile criminal histories available in adult courts; and

transferring juvenile offenders to adult correctional centres when they reach 17 years of age if they have six or more months of their sentence remaining.

The proposed legislation is predicated upon the Government's view that Queensland needs tough measures to come to grips with a 'generation' of young offenders which has allegedly arisen due to the former Government's 'slap-on-the-wrist' mentality. But what do the actual statistics reveal?

Over the 2010-2011 and 2011-12 financial years the number of children that appeared before the Children's Court of Queensland and the Children's (Magistrates) Courts actually fell by 8.6 per cent and 6.9 per cent respectively.

Contrary to the Government's view, a further analysis of the numbers leads to a conclusion that far from a 'generation' of offenders, a relatively small cohort of repeat offenders commit a significant number of overall offences.

No one in their right mind would be against addressing offending and recidivism yet many people are frustrated with the 'revolving door' which is so often associated with repeat youth offenders.

The question remains however, what is the best way to address this?

It has long been accepted that some youth offenders regard a sentence of detention as a badge of honour.

As a result, any suggestion that naming such offenders will lead to them being 'shamed' is naive.

Indeed, there can be no doubt that certain recidivist offenders will not think twice about committing offences for no other reason than seeing their names 'up in lights'.

For those offenders who do not value such notoriety, there is the clear potential for them to be harassed or bullied, thus acting as an impediment to them re-engaging with society in a positive manner and to their prospects of rehabilitation.

The Queensland Attorney-General, Jarrod Bleijie, himself has openly acknowledged that naming and shaming will adversely affect future employment prospects of these individuals—but says that such is an added deterrent to offending.

However, the impulsivity amongst juveniles and their reduced capacity to foresee the consequences of their actions markedly reduces such a deterrent effect.

The key to reducing recidivism lies squarely in addressing the underlying causes of offending.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are grossly over-represented in all these categories and therefore, not surprisingly, also within the criminal justice system.

Early intervention and prevention strategies are the keys to not just targeting recidivism, but in preventing offending behaviour altogether.

It is not a question of throwing taxpayer dollars at the problem, but rather one of utilising resources more wisely.

As in the health sector, we should be looking at approaches to crime that work to address the 'cause' rather than just the 'symptoms' after the fact.

The preference towards populous and 'band-aid' reforms over meaningful and substantive initiatives aimed at addressing the underlying causes of crime will eventually lead to increased offending rates and less safe communities.

It is particularly disappointing that in a state where there is already an appallingly disproportionate over-incarceration rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth, we are contemplating legislative reforms that will undoubtedly make an already deplorable situation worse.

Gregory Shadbolt is the Principal Legal Officer for the Queensland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Service Ltd.

This is an edited version of an article first published in the Indigenous Law Bulletin titled 'Naming and shaming youth offenders: Bonfire of the vanities'.

32 comments

Finally, someone speaking sense. The large majority of juvenile offenders cease offending as a juvenile. Their frontal cortex is still developing, most come as you said from horrendous circumstances, where crime is a way to survive. We need to help these young people, not harass them or make the rest of their lives when they aren't offending painful and difficult. Just some more people in glass buildings throwing stones, instead of actually trying to fix the problem. It is so incredibly obvious that the AG has failed to speak to anyone who works with these young people or is an expert in the area.

Commenter

Ingrid

Date and time

February 14, 2014, 4:57PM

+1 youth have no concept of consequences, increasing them will not deter the crime levels, but instead set them up to fail and greater chance of re-offending later in life. We need greater preventative measures and rehabilitation services, throwing kids in detention just increases their access to other youth with problems and they will learn negatively off each other. The naming and shaming is past a joke as yes they will just seek for notoriety, acting out is usually seeking attention, positive or negative.

Commenter

Jamie Stacy

Date and time

February 14, 2014, 6:16PM

Hey Ingrid, it sounds as if you are either an "expert in the area" or have ties to Legal Aid.

Commenter

Bernie Gee

Date and time

February 15, 2014, 9:19AM

I have no ties to any legal organisations, but I have worked with these young people, including with the mental health and alcohol and drug issues. Their issues are complex, childhoods are tougher than most of us could ever imagine. The AG's solutions will achieve nothing, only make things worse.

Commenter

Ingrid

Date and time

February 17, 2014, 7:17PM

This guy gets paid very well to defend these repeat offenders so of course he want's to keep his money coming in. The present hands off approach is not working so something harsher has to happen. I sure most employers would like to know if prospective employees have a long history of theft, arson or serious assaults.

Commenter

Steve

Date and time

February 14, 2014, 5:23PM

your brain is in your rear end. his money will roll in regardless of the penalties, more if the penalties are harsher. wake up mate you could be the next one being treated like a piece of garbage, then you'll be crying wishing someone would help you.

Commenter

tom2137

Date and time

February 14, 2014, 5:53PM

I'd be prepared to bet he doesn't get very well paid at all. I suspect he could earn a helluva lot more in private practice.

A carefully thought out excellent article, obviously written from a wealth of personal experience. How much experience do you have in this field, Steve?

Commenter

Paul D

Location

Brissie

Date and time

February 14, 2014, 7:03PM

There are ways of accommodating the rightful needs of employers without running roughshod over the need of a juvenile offender to gain a chance of rehabilitation. It's already available to employers.

Children of families in all walks of life can go off the rails for no discernible reason. Most of them settle down eventually. Publicly damning them will leave many of them with no alternative to a life of crime to support themselves. Which is stupid beyond measure. But that's how this government rolls.